Question about schrodinger equation

In summary, the Schrodinger equation can be written as \hat{H} \psi = E\psi and is used to find stationary states in quantum mechanics. This equation is not true for time-dependent cases, where the time-dependent form \hat{H} \psi = i\hbar \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t} is used. The time-independent equation can be seen as an analogy to the static equilibrium equation in Newtonian physics, while the time-dependent equation allows for more general solutions. The time-independent equation only holds for states of definite energy, while the time-dependent equation holds for any quantum state. The phase factor in the wave equation appears when the wave function changes over time, and it is
  • #1
stunner5000pt
1,461
2
Note that this is not homework... I am just curious

The time independant Schrodinger equation can be written as
[tex] \hat{H} \psi = E\psi[/tex]


IS there ever a time taht the above equation is not true??

what about the time dependant case?? We haven't gone over that in class so I am not quite sure about the cases.

Thanks for your input!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
stunner5000pt said:
Note that this is not homework... I am just curious

The time independant Schrodinger equation can be written as
[tex] \hat{H} \psi = E\psi[/tex]


IS there ever a time taht the above equation is not true??

The time-independent SE gives you those specific states that are stationnary. If you're looking for those states, then that equation is for you :smile:
It is not a general solution to a quantum problem, but looks as specific kinds of cases. However, it also turns out that the solutions of this equation (which is simply the eigen-equation of the hamiltonian in fact) allows you to find the more general time-dependent solutions.

As an analogy, consider it something like the static equilibrium equation F = 0 in Newtonian physics. It is not the general dynamical solution dp/dt = F, but only gives you the solutions of static equilibrium. However, here, it is less clear how the static solutions can help you find the general dynamic solutions, while in the quantum case, there is a clear link.
 
  • #3
As vanesch says, it only satisfies the stationary states. What it does is gives you the states of definite energy (which are useful for several reasons), in this case the energy is E.

Compare with

[tex]\hat{p}\psi=p\psi[/tex]

which works for states of definite momentum, specifically of momentum p.

Both of these are the eigenvalue equations for the respective operators. The time dependent equation (the Schrodinger equation proper) is given by

[tex]\hat{H}| \psi \rangle = i\hbar \frac{d}{dt} | \psi \rangle[/tex]

and this holds for any quantum state. One can almost (problems arise with spin-statistics) view this equation as defining which [itex]| \psi \rangle[/itex] are allowable quantum states. In the case of time-independent Hamiltonians, we can separate the time dependence out, as I'm sure you will soon find out in class.
 
  • #4
The answers above are great, but here are some shorter ones.

stunner5000pt said:
[tex] \hat{H} \psi = E\psi[/tex]
IS there ever a time taht the above equation is not true??

Yes.

stunner5000pt said:
what about the time dependant case?? We haven't gone over that in class so I am not quite sure about the cases.

The above equation does not hold for time-dependent cases. i.e. when the wave function changes shape over time. A simple example is a particle moving through empty space (as a plane wave).

To make the time dependent form we replace the constant E with an expression which can handle the variations over time [itex]\mathrm{i} \hbar \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t}[/itex]:

[tex] \hat{H} \psi = \mathrm{i} \hbar \frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t}[/tex]

AFAIK, this is identical to the form given in the previous posts with kets.

Hope this helps.
 
  • #5
so stationary states are defined at hte square modulus of the wave function not having a time dependance.
How would we know this before solving for the wavefunction? If it was time independant then certain [itex] \psi [/itex] would not depend on time

would this mean taht all solutions of the TISE (time indepdnant schrodinger equation) are stationary states?? Since the solution for the time dependence is always [itex] \exp(-iEt/\hbar) [/itex]. If we could do that then certainly our potential is not time varying. Hence there's never a time depdance and the state is stationary always?
 
  • #6
stunner5000pt said:
so stationary states are defined at hte square modulus of the wave function not having a time dependance.
How would we know this before solving for the wavefunction?

We don't, but if we do know then we can use that to simplify the problem. If we try and solve a dynamic problem with the time-independent equation then we should eventually end up with some nonsensical expression.

It should be quite obvious when to use which one. Since ground states shouldn't change spontaneously we can use the time-independent equation to approximate them. If we wish to model an evolving state then we need to use the time-dependent form.


I think I may have made a mistake in the formula somewhere though. I keep thinking that [itex]\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t}[/itex] is equal to zero when nothing is changing over time, so that we should have [itex]\hat{H} \psi = 0[/itex] for the time-independent form. So, I'm not sure exactly why the E's are not zero... probably some oversight on my part...
 
  • #7
Jheriko said:
I think I may have made a mistake in the formula somewhere though. I keep thinking that [itex]\frac{\partial \psi}{\partial t}[/itex] is equal to zero when nothing is changing over time, so that we should have [itex]\hat{H} \psi = 0[/itex] for the time-independent form. So, I'm not sure exactly why the E's are not zero... probably some oversight on my part...

Time-independence of a physical system, only requires the square modulus of the wavefunction to be time-independent, not the wave function itself. This means that the wave function itself can vary with time, although only in a way that does not change its sqaure modulus, which means that it can only change by phasing, in which case [itex]\hat{H} \psi = E \psi[/itex]
 
  • #8
Ah, of course, not sure why I forgot that, it is even mentioned already in this thread. Its also pretty damned important for calculations... oh well.
 
  • #9
Aero said:
Time-independence of a physical system, only requires the square modulus of the wavefunction to be time-independent, not the wave function itself. This means that the wave function itself can vary with time, although only in a way that does not change its sqaure modulus, which means that it can only change by phasing, in which case [itex]\hat{H} \psi = E \psi[/itex]

change the phasing...

where is the pahse factor appearing in the wave equation?
Lets say for the wavefunction of hte infinite square well

[tex] \Psi(x,t) = N \sin\frac{n\pi x}{a} e^{-\frac{\i E_{n}t}{\hbar}} [/tex]

well a wave can also be written like
[tex] Asin(kx-\phi) + Bcos(kx-\phi) [/tex]

i don't quite see how the phi factor comes about in the wave equation... where would it be??
could it be like this?
[tex] \Psi(x,t) = N \sin\left(\frac{n\pi x}{a}+\Phi\right) e^{-\frac{\i E_{n}t}{\hbar}} [/tex]
 
  • #10
You can add an arbitrary constant complex phase factor to a QM wave function, without changing the physics:

[tex] \Psi(x,t) = N \sin\left(\frac{n\pi x}{a} \right) e^{-i \left( \frac{ E_{n}t}{\hbar} + \phi \right)} [/tex]Physically, this corresponds to the fact that the "zero point" of potential energy (and therefore also of total energy) is arbitrary. Note what happens when you set [itex]V(x) = V_0[/itex] (a constant) inside the infinite square well, and then solve the Schrödinger equation again.
 
Last edited:
  • #11
jtbell said:
You can add an arbitrary constant complex phase factor to a QM wave function, without changing the physics:

[tex] \Psi(x,t) = N \sin\left(\frac{n\pi x}{a} \right) e^{-i \left( \frac{ E_{n}t}{\hbar} + \phi \right)} [/tex]


Physically, this corresponds to the fact that the "zero point" of potential energy (and therefore also of total energy) is arbitrary. Note what happens when you set [itex]V(x) = V_0[/itex] (a constant) inside the infinite square well, and then solve the Schrödinger equation again.

then wouldn't we have to consider different situations for the solution suppose E> V0, E<V0, E=V0??

three possible solutions then right? Just want to make sure before i go ahead with this. The wavefunction would still ahve to vanish at the boundary points, though.
 
  • #12
jtbell said:
You can add an arbitrary constant complex phase factor to a QM wave function, without changing the physics:

[tex] \Psi(x,t) = N \sin\left(\frac{n\pi x}{a} \right) e^{-i \left( \frac{ E_{n}t}{\hbar} + \phi \right)} [/tex]Physically, this corresponds to the fact that the "zero point" of potential energy (and therefore also of total energy) is arbitrary. Note what happens when you set [itex]V(x) = V_0[/itex] (a constant) inside the infinite square well, and then solve the Schrödinger equation again.

Except that it won't give you a constant phase factor, but one of the form [tex]e^{-i V_0 t/\hbar}[/tex]
 
  • #13
Oops, you're right. :blushing:

I should have realized that "relocating" the bottom of the well would simply change [itex]E_n[/itex] to [itex]E_n - V_0[/itex].

The arbitrary [itex]\phi[/itex] simply indicates the "initial value" of the complex oscillation, and doesn't correspond to anything physical. Any time you calculate an expectation value or probability, it always contributes a net factor of [itex]e^{i \phi} e^{-i \phi} = 1[/itex].

This is true only for a [itex]\phi[/itex] that doesn't depend on x, of course. If [itex]\phi[/itex] depends on x, that is, the initial phase is different at different locations instead of being uniform everywhere, things get interesting! :biggrin:
 
  • #14
stunner5000pt said:
then wouldn't we have to consider different situations for the solution suppose E> V0, E<V0, E=V0??

In principle yes, but you already have to do that when [itex]V_0 = 0[/itex], i.e. consider the cases E > 0, E < 0, E = 0.

The wavefunction would still ahve to vanish at the boundary points, though.

For [itex]E < V_0[/itex] you'll find that it's impossible to construct a wave function that vanishes at both sides of the well. Have you done the finite square well ([itex]V = V_0[/itex] outside the well, and 0 inside) yet, or tunneling through a barrier (V = 0 outside and [itex]V = V_0[/itex] inside)? These are the situations where people usually first tackle [itex]E < V_0[/itex].
 
  • #15
jtbell said:
In principle yes, but you already have to do that when [itex]V_0 = 0[/itex], i.e. consider the cases E > 0, E < 0, E = 0.



For [itex]E < V_0[/itex] you'll find that it's impossible to construct a wave function that vanishes at both sides of the well. Have you done the finite square well ([itex]V = V_0[/itex] outside the well, and 0 inside) yet, or tunneling through a barrier (V = 0 outside and [itex]V = V_0[/itex] inside)? These are the situations where people usually first tackle [itex]E < V_0[/itex].

yes i have done the tunnelling cases
so if its impossible to make the wavefunction vanish at the end points then what boundary conditions could we apply??
 
  • #16
We don't have any choice in the boundary conditions. The boundary conditions are fixed by the choice of potential. For an infinite square well, we must require that [itex]\psi = 0[/itex] at the boundaries. If a general mathematical solution of the S.E. with a particular E cannot satisfy that condition, then it is not admissible as a physical solution for this situation.

As you've seen in the tunnelling case, the general solution for E < V involves real exponentials: [itex]\psi = Ae^{kx} + Be^{-kx}[/itex]. There's no way to set the arbitrary constants A and B so that [itex]\psi = 0[/itex] at both boundaries of the infinite square well. Therefore it is impossible to have E < V for that situation.
 
  • #17
Oh i have another question about this
Is this always true??
[tex] \hat{H} \Psi = E \Psi [/tex]
Here we talk about the wavefunction in general
I think this is not always true ... but i don't know understand why?? I m thinking that it ahs something to do with the time dependant case where the right is
[tex] i\hbar \frac{d}{dt} \Psi [/tex]
this term need not repsent the energy... right?
 
  • #18
stunner5000pt said:
Oh i have another question about this
Is this always true??
[tex] \hat{H} \Psi = E \Psi [/tex]
Here we talk about the wavefunction in general
I think this is not always true ... but i don't know understand why?? I m thinking that it ahs something to do with the time dependant case where the right is
[tex] i\hbar \frac{d}{dt} \Psi [/tex]
this term need not repsent the energy... right?

You've already been explained the difference between a time-dependent Hamiltonian in Schroedinger picture and a time-independent one. And how that determins the time-evolution of the state vector.

[tex] \hat{H} \Psi = E \Psi [/tex]

is a spectral equation for an operator on separable Hilbert space and nothing more. It has solutions in the Hilbert space iff the spectrum of the Hamiltonian is discreet.

Daniel.
 

1. What is the Schrodinger equation?

The Schrodinger equation is a mathematical equation that describes how the quantum state of a physical system changes with time. It was developed by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrodinger in 1926 and is a fundamental concept in quantum mechanics.

2. Why is the Schrodinger equation important?

The Schrodinger equation is important because it allows us to predict the behavior of quantum systems, such as atoms and molecules. It has been extensively tested and has been shown to accurately describe the behavior of these systems, making it a crucial tool in understanding the microscopic world.

3. How does the Schrodinger equation differ from classical mechanics?

The Schrodinger equation differs from classical mechanics in that it describes the behavior of particles at the quantum level, where classical mechanics breaks down. In classical mechanics, particles have well-defined positions and velocities, while in quantum mechanics, particles have wave-like properties and their exact locations cannot be determined.

4. What is the role of the Schrodinger equation in quantum entanglement?

The Schrodinger equation is used to describe the behavior of particles that are entangled, meaning they are connected in such a way that the state of one particle is dependent on the state of the other. This phenomenon is crucial for understanding quantum teleportation and other quantum technologies.

5. Are there any limitations to the Schrodinger equation?

While the Schrodinger equation has been incredibly successful in describing the behavior of quantum systems, it does have limitations. It does not take into account the effects of relativity and does not fully explain certain quantum phenomena such as the collapse of the wave function. These limitations have led to the development of more complex theories, such as quantum field theory and quantum electrodynamics.

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
758
Replies
11
Views
831
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
19
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
787
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
804
  • Quantum Physics
Replies
11
Views
1K
Back
Top